Yes *******s probably wouldn't enjoy seeing Fed get owned. Fed is actually a very good clay courter but Nadal has the answer for Fed.

Click to expand...

If hypocritical *******s like yourself got their way, the clay-court season wouldn't be over until after Wimbledon, because Wimbledon would basically be green clay. Oh wait, it already basically is. See Federer S&V-ing less now than in '03, and good grass-courters being knocked out before the QF with clay-court specialists getting that far.

I love how the OP posts something that refers to neither nadal or fed, then the trolls just come out to play. I'm also happy to see the dirt go away, but I'm happy to see any tennis on tv, including clay.

btw, Federer had a 65-50 edge in winners over Nadal at that Wimbledon.

Face it, he is just the more talented player, period. Grass should exemplify that, but it's been ruined.

Whatever they can do to get more S&V, they should do. They better get rid of this crappy horribly excuse for grass, and put in fast low-bouncing grass.

Click to expand...

He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!

I love how the OP posts something that refers to neither nadal or fed, then the trolls just come out to play. I'm also happy to see the dirt go away, but I'm happy to see any tennis on tv, including clay.

Click to expand...

Seriously. After reading what the OP posted I was thinking of how ugly red clay is (it reminds me of red clay in South Carolina), but people just assumed that the OP is a Fed fan.

If hypocritical *******s like yourself got their way, the clay-court season wouldn't be over until after Wimbledon, because Wimbledon would basically be green clay. Oh wait, it already basically is. See Federer S&V-ing less now than in '03, and good grass-courters being knocked out before the QF with clay-court specialists getting that far.

He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!

If you mean several years as in Dubai 2006 I guess that's quite a way to look at it.

Click to expand...

Yea, when there's a significant turn-around in a rivalry, a clear dividing line, that is a reasonable way to look at it. Sort of like when Federer started beating Nalbandian most of the time, or Hewitt, or Agassi, etc.

When you admitted you hadn't seen Edberg and Rafter's volley I ceased taking you seriously as a poster.

Click to expand...

I'll take that as a compliment, since anyone a paranoid nutcase like you takes seriously, must be a joke.

And I didn't say I hadn't seen their volleys. You're just being deceitful and distoring, which of course I'd expect. I said I haven't seen enough to contest the statement that they're much better than Federer in that. I would need to see many many matches -- not just highlights, or replayed matches -- to make an informed comparison. It's called being honest, something I know you're averse to.

Anyone who hasn't been watching tennis consistently over the last 20 years or so, can't really make a statement -- from their first-hand experience -- about who's a better volleyer; because then, unless they specifically dug up a lot of matches, and not just great matches, but average run-of-the-mill matches too.

If someone's seen a most of Edberg's matches, and most of Federer's matches, they can make an informed comparison from first-hand experience. Alternatively, if they've seen a significant number (50 to 100 or more) of randomly selected matches from each player, in retrospect, they can make that statement. I'm sure the concepts behind this -- that is, statistics -- are entirely beyond your comprehension, though.

Yea, when there's a significant turn-around in a rivalry, a clear dividing line, that is a reasonable way to look at it. Sort of like when Federer started beating Nalbandian most of the time, or Hewitt, or Agassi, etc.

After RG 2006, it is 5-4 Federer, 2-0 on grass, 2-0 on HC, 1-4 on clay.

That's a pretty obvious turn-around outside of clay. Nadal is obviously helped out by Federer making just about every clay-court final he makes, and him not usually meeting Federer in the HC finals. I'm sorry if you can't see reality, but that's it.

I'll take that as a compliment, since anyone a paranoid nutcase like you takes seriously, must be a joke.

And I didn't say I hadn't seen their volleys. You're just being deceitful and distoring, which of course I'd expect. I said I haven't seen enough to contest the statement that they're much better than Federer in that. I would need to see many many matches -- not just highlights, or replayed matches -- to make an informed comparison. It's called being honest, something I know you're averse to.

Anyone who hasn't been watching tennis consistently over the last 20 years or so, can't really make a statement -- from their first-hand experience -- about who's a better volleyer; because then, unless they specifically dug up a lot of matches, and not just great matches, but average run-of-the-mill matches too.

If someone's seen a most of Edberg's matches, and most of Federer's matches, they can make an informed comparison from first-hand experience. Alternatively, if they've seen a significant number (50 to 100 or more) of randomly selected matches from each player, in retrospect, they can make that statement. I'm sure the concepts behind this -- that is, statistics -- are entirely beyond your comprehension, though.

I'll take that as a compliment, since anyone a paranoid nutcase like you takes seriously, must be a joke.

And I didn't say I hadn't seen their volleys. You're just being deceitful and distoring, which of course I'd expect. I said I haven't seen enough to contest the statement that they're much better than Federer in that. I would need to see many many matches -- not just highlights, or replayed matches -- to make an informed comparison. It's called being honest, something I know you're averse to.

Anyone who hasn't been watching tennis consistently over the last 20 years or so, can't really make a statement -- from their first-hand experience -- about who's a better volleyer; because then, unless they specifically dug up a lot of matches, and not just great matches, but average run-of-the-mill matches too.

If someone's seen a most of Edberg's matches, and most of Federer's matches, they can make an informed comparison from first-hand experience. Alternatively, if they've seen a significant number (50 to 100 or more) of randomly selected matches from each player, in retrospect, they can make that statement. I'm sure the concepts behind this -- that is, statistics -- are entirely beyond your comprehension, though.

Click to expand...

Exactly! I never watched Rod Laver, Lew Hoad, Don Budge, et al. I would never say what Nadal could do as opposed to them. You see what I'm saying? I would feel like an imbecile making a claim like that!

No, I am not back-tracking. I was explaining why you were being deceitful to anyone who didn't see what I'd written. I didn't say I hadn't seen Edberg and Rafter. I said I haven't seen enough of them to make a first-hand comparison. I have seen hundreds of Federer matches (don't know the exact number, but almost everytime one was being broadcast on ESPN, I saw it; also had Wimbledon Live and will have it again; unfortunately, the FO, USO, and AO all are lame and don't have the equivalent of Wimbledon Live). I have not seen hundreds of Edberg matches.

That just means I wasn't interested in tennis when Edberg was playing.

Nadal should never, i mean never be superior on grass to Federer.Grass has always benefited the offensive playmaker, the shotmaker.Nadal can be a shotmaker but he hardly blast winners like Federer does on a fast court.

Exactly! I never watched Rod Laver, Lew Hoad, Don Budge, et al. I would never say what Nadal could do as opposed to them. You see what I'm saying? I would feel like an imbecile making a claim like that!

P.S.-Are you saying you watched Edberg and skipped Rafter?

Click to expand...

I don't know what you're talking about. I'm not making any comparisons between Federer and players I haven't seen as much as Federer. I'm simply saying that Federer has great volleys. And if it is true that, compared to Edberg, Becker, Rafter, etc, his volleys come up lacking, that wouldn't cause me to say his volleys aren't great. I'd just say that they're volleys are beyond great.

PS: No, I'm not saying I skipped Rafter...I was just referring to Edberg only to save on typing.

You know those winners include aces right? Off the ground Nadal was superior, and I believe Federer himself alluded to that...

By the way this thread is ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Right, aces are a part of the game. And they're the part that is most completely dependent on that player. If he won by acing out every one of his service games, sleeping on return games, and eeking out a tie-breaker, that would be well-deserved, and he'd be the better player.

You guys really shouldn't care THIS much about who wins or loses...how on earth does this affect your lives?

Click to expand...

It doesn't. The outcome isn't in our hands, and I never said Rafa will win. I said I hope he wins. I don't remember what post of mine offended him, but he came out of nowhere getting angry and carrying on. Me? I'm in a strange mood so it's funny.

You guys really shouldn't care THIS much about who wins or loses...how on earth does this affect your lives?

Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't care that much about whether he wins...I hope he does, but if not, oh well...he got to another FO final, which is better than everyone save Nadal. I just don't like the hyperbolization of odds given by <some> Nadal fans, and distortion. It was disappointing when Federer lost MC and Hamburg, but ultimately the guy who played better won, and Fed deserved to lose for going away from what was working; but oh well.

From 2:00 the presenter says to Roger that Rafael has a question for you. He likes you a lot you can tell. Rafael asks "what did you do to get is your game so complete?" Fed shrugs a little and chuckles " well he's also very complete", and then says he doesn't really know how he did it. Had good coaches etc..then goes on to say that people forget that Nadal is not just a clay Courter. Had good results in grass for the past years......Nadal said something like this in his presser too.

Q. Following on this question, he says that if somebody can win Wimbledon against Federer, he says you can. You played a beautiful final, and that you could have won. The match was very close. Other people would think that you're basically a clay court player. What would you say?

RAFAEL NADAL: When people say positive things about you it's always good. It shows that you're doing something good. So I'd like to thank Borg for everything he says about me.

Now, for those who think I'm just a clay player means that they're not watching the other tournaments.

Click to expand...

Earlier Rafael was in the show and he was talking Fed up aswell.

sure he doesn't win most of the hardcourts, but he has titles in that surface, he's always a factor in those tournaments and his worst results are quarter finals and semi-finals. Seriously, i don't understand. I too wondered if he was just a clay courter when i first saw him in Roland Garros 2005. Then he won Toronto, China open, Madrid Masters I started to think, mmm, not perfect there yet but maybe can improve, even though the guy won.
Myy point is, anyway, why can't we all just get along?!?!!?!!!!!:cry: Rafael and Roger even text each other, he said in a TTC interview. He just wouldn't say about what because is that kind of private when it comes to life outside of court. Now comeon, people.:cry:

I could only bare to read the first three posts of the thread. First of all, Federer is the second best clay courter by far so I don't know why Fed fans would hate this part of the season. Second, Nadal doesn't become irrelevant for the remainder of the season, far from it, so the rest of you should shove it also. You're all so in love with your favorite player you can't enjoy the sport some times, it's sad.

There are no clay courts where I live (maybe in some private club which I don't know about), and though I prefer watching hard court tennis, I've never played on clay and would really really like to. So for that reason alone I don't mind clay court tennis, though it does get a bit repetitive at times.

He's been losing to the boy since the boy was a teenager and still hasn't evened up the h2h. That's the part I love. Four years and he still hasn't figured him out. I think he should. It's embarrassing!